<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lessons from the Struggle: Making the Case for Democratic Centralism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2009/06/22/lessons-from-the-struggle-making-the-case-for-democratic-centralism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2009/06/22/lessons-from-the-struggle-making-the-case-for-democratic-centralism/</link>
	<description>The Politics, Economics &#38; Culture of Radical Change</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:56:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Horn</title>
		<link>http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2009/06/22/lessons-from-the-struggle-making-the-case-for-democratic-centralism/comment-page-1/#comment-40719</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Horn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2009/06/22/lessons-from-the-struggle-making-the-case-for-democratic-centralism/#comment-40719</guid>
		<description>First of all, I don&#039;t see that a case needs to be made for democratic centralism because that has been, and still largely is, the fundamental weakness of ostensibly democratically managed societies or organizations. Also it has little legitimacy in today&#039;s world. 

Secondly, the argument framed as one of complete consensus versus centralized control is a false one. Consensus doesn&#039;t have to be an absolute 100% to make any decisions.  People can decide how much of a decision is necessary to balance efficiency with participation in decision making.  Thus, under some circumstances they may choose a weaker consensus, and in other circumstances choose a stronger consensus.  But the point is, they choose the arrangement--not some elite.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, I don&#8217;t see that a case needs to be made for democratic centralism because that has been, and still largely is, the fundamental weakness of ostensibly democratically managed societies or organizations. Also it has little legitimacy in today&#8217;s world. </p>
<p>Secondly, the argument framed as one of complete consensus versus centralized control is a false one. Consensus doesn&#8217;t have to be an absolute 100% to make any decisions.  People can decide how much of a decision is necessary to balance efficiency with participation in decision making.  Thus, under some circumstances they may choose a weaker consensus, and in other circumstances choose a stronger consensus.  But the point is, they choose the arrangement&#8211;not some elite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

